Drugs legal in the US if used to talk to god ......Follow

No I am not joking!

Linky







What a dangerous precident this sets.

I do not take drugs but if I did .. and lived in the US .. I would be starting a religious cult based on my drug and its potency in "reaching god". Anyone claiming it is illegal ... I would cite this case.

And besides all that, how on earth is a drug supposed to bring you closer to god?

They didn;t claim that, they claimed that it allowed them to understand God. This has been going on for centuries. Even natives used drugs for enlightenment. I can see using a drug to become deeply focused into a meditative state that would allow you to perhaps think more clearly regarding your belief or teaching. I would not bring in the question of Divinity since no religion can boast that with backing evidence.

Crazy people they are too

Actually on a serious note, is the communion not based on the last supper of Christ. Where he and his disciples ate bread and wine. There was symbolism of this being his "body", that has nothing to do with understanding him, does it?
I seem to remember something about Judas being mentioned by Christ too "someone will betray me" or something or other ...

I best play my DvD of "dogma" and study

Some Indians have used Peyote for hundreds of years in ceremonial rituals, and I'm pretty sure it's legal on Reservation land, and has been.

The whole basis of faith is belief without the requirement for "backing evidence." Science requires evidentiary support. Religion merely requires a belief in and following of the tenets of the religion.

Yeah ... It's one of the drugs I was always waaaaaay to scared to try. Shrooms was wild enough. Extending the trip for another 20 hours sounds insane.


/wild memories

I've actually known people involved in this religion in the U.S. I'm sure they will be very happy with this decision. And while I did think it was a bit weird at first, it didn't take me long to get past it. They are good people with good hearts, they don't hurt anyone and wouldn't ever, so whatever makes them happy is fine with me.

I would have asked what (s)he/they said before passing judgement if they understand 'em so well.

/sigh...... And this one too:

"Supreme Court rules against post office
Woman who tripped on mail at door sued
Jennifer A. Dlouhy, Hearst Newspapers

Thursday, February 23, 2006


Printable Version
Email This Article




Washington -- People who tumble over mail left in their doorways can sue the U.S. Postal Service, the Supreme Court ruled Wednesday.

In a 7-1 decision, the panel said a Pennsylvania woman could continue her lawsuit blaming the post office when she tripped over packages and letters left on her porch in 2001. The woman wants the U.S. Postal Service to pick up the tab for injuries in the fall.

But the federal government argued that the Postal Service was immune from lawsuits under a federal statute blocking suits involving the "loss, miscarriage or negligent transmission of letters."

Writing for a majority of the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the federal law was only intended to cover losses from mail that is misdirected, lost or damaged en route.

"Congress did not intend to immunize all postal activities," Kennedy wrote.

Kennedy noted that in a 1984 case, the Supreme Court said the Postal Service could be held liable for accidents involving its delivery trucks. Placing mail in a way that creates a risk of accidents is no different, Kennedy wrote.

Justice Clarence Thomas was the only dissenter in the case. Newly installed Justice Samuel Alito did not participate.

Government lawyers had implored the Supreme Court not to allow the Pennsylvania woman's suit to go forward because, they said, it would open the floodgates for slip-and-fall claims that would be hard to disprove.

At risk, the government said, was the efficiency of the entire mail system. Every day, the U.S. Postal Service delivers roughly 660 million pieces of mail to as many as 142 million mailboxes, doorsteps and other drop-offs.

Mail carriers often have to place packages on front porches or at doorsteps because they won't fit through mail slots or in boxes, Assistant Solicitor General Patricia Millett told the court during oral arguments in November. Millett argued the Postal Service was defenseless against slip-and-fall lawsuits, which can be filed long after someone trips over a package without any witnesses.

Gerry McKiernan, spokesman for the Postal Service, said that in the wake of the decision, carriers would receive a refresher course on delivery protocols.

The Associated Press contributed to this report. The case is Dolan vs. United States Postal Service, No. 04-848. "


SO, basically I can't wait to claim religious affiliation with (insert group needing illegal drugs to Understand God better here - not to be confused with wine and that Neco wafer-like crap refered to as the "host" which are legal for church or otherwise... although I don't know who would voluntarily say, snack on a bag of "hosts," ) and have a grand ole tea party celebration after I claim Post Office Negligence when I "trip" on a poorly placed package outside my door...

YAY lawsuits and drugs! Maybe people can sacrificially kill others claiming religious beliefs next! WOOT - I can't wait to see how it all unfolds!

It better be, you white DEVILS!